The Gay Thread

[JWBear]

Hate crimes are usually not random. It's simply not the same as your run-of-the-mill mugging or robbery. They are motivated solely by hatred of a particular group (or groups). The victims are targeted specifically due to their (actual or perceived) membership in a particular class. The violence is more horrific in these types of crimes.

The purpose of hate crimes laws is not to say that members of the protected classes are some how “special”, and that random crimes against them are somehow worse. The laws are a statement by society that it will no longer tolerate violence that is directed specifically towards a certain group - violence that is motivated by hatred.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by JWBear

Hate crimes are usually not random. It's simply not the same as your run-of-the-mill mugging or robbery. They are motivated solely by hatred of a particular group (or groups). The victims are targeted specifically due to their (actual or perceived) membership in a particular class. The violence is more horrific in these types of crimes.

Really?

A woman who is white and straight and is raped and her throat slashed and her body beaten is LESS horrific than a gay man who is raped and has his throat slashed and body beaten?

A man who sets out to kill a woman is not random.

I'm sorry but that is absurd and wrong.

All violent crime requires hatred and anger-it should not matter what the thinking was or the "membership" of a group of people.

A murdered gay man did not suffer more agony and fear than the murdered woman-his family does not feel more pain and loss.

Hate crime laws create different classes of victims- it's wrong.

Prosecute the crime equally- no matter the motivation. Someone who gets punished for a "hate crime" should not do more jail time than someone who did not- they should do the same.

We can not and should not attempt to prosecute THOUGHT.

Equality-
Marriage
Serving in the Armed Services

Equal-and the process and punishment for violent crimes against anyone should be equal too.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Prosecute the crime equally- no matter the motivation. Someone who gets punished for a "hate crime" should

Are you against distinctions between murder 1, murder 2, manslaughter, etc.?

eta: asked because those are crimes that carry vastly different punishments, based only on the distinction of motive.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Are you against distinctions between murder 1, murder 2, manslaughter, etc.?

eta: asked because those are crimes that carry vastly different punishments, based only on the distinction of motive.

It would be interesting to look at what defines those more distinctly-

Like- a drunk driver may be charged with man slaughter instead of murder. They did not set out to kill.

A crime of passion where someone is killed vs. a plotted hit.

But of ALL of those distinctions-it doesn't matter to me if the victim is gay, straight, black, white.....the victims are equal.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Really? ...

A murdered gay man did not suffer more agony and fear than the murdered woman-his family does not feel more pain and loss.

So what about the fear I felt when Matthew Shepard was murdered vs. the totally didn't feel a thing when Matilda Himmelfarb was murdered.

Never heard of Matilda Himmelfarb? Exactly.

Matilda was murdered for her money. Matthew was murdered because he was gay. I suppose "hate crimes" is a poor term because, you are right, almost all crimes have an element of hatred. And Gemini Cricket is right that terrorism has been too watered down, but that's why the punishments are enhanced. Because what we are calling "hate crimes" are literally terrorism.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

So what about the fear I felt when Matthew Shepard was murdered vs. the totally didn't feel a thing when Matilda Himmelfarb was murdered.

Never heard of Matilda Himmelfarb? Exactly.

Matilda was murdered for her money. Matthew was murdered because he was gay. I suppose "hate crimes" is a poor term because, you are right, almost all crimes have an element of hatred. And Gemini Cricket is right that terrorism has been too watered down, but that's why the punishments are enhanced. Because what we are calling "hate crimes" are literally terrorism.

We can all feel fear of some sort of crime-

Maybe women are more impacted by fear of rape and murder.
Mothers may fear someone killing their children.

We may feel impact and fear based on our similarities to a victim-but punishment should not be meted out based on the fear impact on others- it should be based on the crime.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

But of ALL of those distinctions-it doesn't matter to me if the victim is gay, straight, black, white.....the victims are equal.

Perhaps not, but we as a society are already perfectly okay with creating different levels of punishment based solely on motive. By your earlier logic, if I shoot someone in the head, my punishment should be no different if I did it because he's some stranger that spilled my beer at a bar and I happened to have my gun on me than if I spent months plotting to kill someone because they hit on my wife once. The actual act is the same, different punishments would amount to punishing thought, no?

Like I said, I don't necessarily think that hate crime legislation is an effective thing to do, but "we can't punish motive because that's being thought-police" isn't a argument against it that holds much water because, well, we already do that with no objection.

Originally Posted by Nephythys

We can all feel fear of some sort of crime-

Maybe women are more impacted by fear of rape and murder.
Mothers may fear someone killing their children.

Which is why rape carries a stiffer penalty than simple assault. Crimes against children can carry larger penalties than crimes against adults. Domestic violence stronger penalties than punching a guy at a bar. We already have many dividing lines where, as a society, we feel it necessary to make a point of discouraging specific behavior.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

Read the full article, "Differences in State Laws Affect Elder Abuse Reporting"

Why is everybody always picking on me?

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Why is everybody always picking on me?

Do you really want to know?

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Perhaps not, but we as a society are already perfectly okay with creating different levels of punishment based solely on motive. By your earlier logic, if I shoot someone in the head, my punishment should be no different if I did it because he's some stranger that spilled my beer at a bar and I happened to have my gun on me than if I spent months plotting to kill someone because they hit on my wife once. The actual act is the same, different punishments would amount to punishing thought, no?

Like I said, I don't necessarily think that hate crime legislation is an effective thing to do, but "we can't punish motive because that's being thought-police" isn't a argument against it that holds much water because, well, we already do that with no objection.

Which is why rape carries a stiffer penalty than simple assault. Crimes against children can carry larger penalties than crimes against adults. Domestic violence stronger penalties than punching a guy at a bar. We already have many dividing lines where, as a society, we feel it necessary to make a point of discouraging specific behavior.

Thank you GD. You made the exact same points I wanted to make last night, but couldn't (sick computer).